July 7, 2012

The American people probably aren’t going to fall in love with Mitt Romney. I’ll tell you this: 95 percent of the people that show up to vote in November are going to show up in that voting booth, and they are going to vote for or against Barack Obama.

Mitt Romney has some friends, relatives and fellow Mormons ... some people that are going to vote for him. But that’s not what this election is about. This election is going to be a referendum on the president’s failed economic policies.

Mitt Romney believes, just like we do, that if we’re going to get the economy back, if we’re going to put the American people back to work, we need to fix the tax code, we need to stop the regulatory juggernaut that’s going on in Washington and we need to fix our economy. Solid guy, he’s going to do a great job, even if you don’t fall in love with him.

I think we've had enough love for a while. Let's not idolize politicians.

"If Boehner is right that people aren't going to fall in love with Romney, it means that Obama will probably win. And Intrade at this minute puts Obama ahead 55.9%."

1. You can vote for Romney without being in love with him. That's my point in the post. It's annoying that Boehner isn't seeing that. And I agree with you that people vote FOR somebody.

2. As the incumbent, Obama should be doing much better than 55.9%. He's even with Romney in the polls. The reason he gets as much as 55.9% at Intrade is because there's a presumption for the incumbent, but incumbent Presidents who are reelected do better than that at this point.

I love that - cultists aren't "friends" but fellow travelers in nonsense. Very true. They'll cut you off at the knees in a heartbeat.

The things Boehner listed, as expecting Romney to do, ANY REPUBLICAN would've done. But fools will treat him as the second coming anyway, nah-nahing all the way - until that Mormon Pandora's Box opens. Then they'll all be "We didn't know," when it was obvious from the start.

Who will win? I don't know - they're both lame - but Romney has an uphill battle, because his nomination kicked me out of the voting booth, and I can't be the only one.

I'm mulling over how much I despise ObamaCare - to see if it's worth compromising my values on cultism - but I doubt it:

Point 1, well yeah, you can vote for someone without falling in love with him. Nobody loved Nixon. But voting for somone you don't at least like is like having sex with someone that doesn't at least turn you on. It's more gratifying to see what's on TV instead.

Point 2, I think Intrade is a better indicator than the polls, since we're dealing with people who have their own money on the line. But then I work in the securities industry so I'm biased.

Personally, although I will be casting my vote for Romney, I believe Obama will win a second term. He's Santa Claus, and as Al Smith said...

"People don't vote against people. They vote FOR a candidate, or they stay home."

The hell they don't. I haven't voted for anyone since '84. And I vote every election. My biggest complaint about the two parties is that they have not provided me with someone to vote for in close to 30 years. In a presidential race, anyway.

In Washington do the barebones job of running the most powerful and one of the best in terms of goodness, if not the best, country in the world.

"... form a more perfect Union [to] establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ..."

And do away with that total misappropriation of the commerce clause crap and the "czars."

My sister had Barack Obama's birthday in her iPhone calendar. That is so totally yuckky. Soooo totally yuckky.

Romney is not exactly my brand of fire-breathing conservative, but he's a serious, sober guy who understands the basics of how an economy works. That makes him a billion times better than the current Urkel the WH.

Mitt Romney should quickly write a book and distribute it, at least in e-book format, for FREE.

It could explain what Romney has been working toward, and the evolution of his views, since the 2008 campaign against McCain. With the help of a ghost-writer or two, he could do it in a month. It's contents could demonstrate Mitt's capability and intelligence.

It would allow the public to get to know the to-be-beloved future leader of the Homeland, and distributing the free e-book would also send a message that he is technologically adept.

He could call it:

Four-and-a-Half Years of Struggle Against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice

Actually, that might be a little too ponderous and unappealing. Instead, how about:

but Romney has an uphill battle, because his nomination kicked me out of the voting booth, and I can't be the only one.

I'm mulling over how much I despise ObamaCare - to see if it's worth compromising my values on cultism - but I doubt it:

The Right has simply "screwed the pooch" this time,...So, then who needs you Crack. Sit this one out, and stay pure in your convictions about cults. Just PLEASE stop posting on these boards about Obama and all his ills, not to mention how Ann was such a jerk for voting for Obama in the first place.

Scott wrote:People don't vote against people. They vote FOR a candidate, or they stay home.

My guess is, a lot of libs are not in fact in love with OBama anymore, yet will vote for him over the other guy. If you are still in love with Obama at this point, then aren't you the sap of all saps? Even Obama girl isn't sure if she's going to vote for Obama. She certianly isnt' going to make a video about himm. MMM mmm mmm. So if it holds true one way, why wouldnt' it hold true the other way? There may not be a lot of peope that love Mitt Romney, but there are a lot of people that HATE Obama. Voting against someone because you hate them is just the flip side of voting for someone because you love them.

So, then who needs you Crack. Sit this one out, and stay pure in your convictions about cults.

Why is that so offensive to you? It's not like it should be a surprise to anyone - my feelings about cults are well known. Daniel Moynihan pointed out “The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society." So why is my focus on cults, and their influence on our culture - and by extension, YOU - so strange, and not a burning issue to the rest of you so-called conservatives? I'll tell you:

Because you're not really conservatives.

You're media-influenced drones, with nothing in your heads more profound than the mediated daily horse race, delivered by the political hacks who told you to rally around Romney because he was "inevitable." And you losers said "Yes, M'am" and that was the end of it - he's DA MAN, no matter that he shows none of the traits of such a creature.

Just PLEASE stop posting on these boards about Obama and all his ills, not to mention how Ann was such a jerk for voting for Obama in the first place.

Why not? Just like what the Right is doing now. Obama's election was groupthink incarnate. I'll call out this stupidity wherever I see it, and - sorry if it busts your bubble - but I saw it then and I see it now. Not Thinking - or that regularly appearing "false choice" I've heard so much about - is the post-Boomer way of life. You can't see your way out and demand to be allowed to continue. Snark, about anyone opposing you, is all you've got:

I read this blog, and it's comments, desperate for an original thought, but I might as well be consulting psychics because the results are the same - nothing but bogus bullshit wrapped in the close-minded veneer of mysticism.

You want to vote for a cultist to save the country, go ahead, but don't blame me for not being conservative (or hypocritical) because it's you with no credibility in that regard:

"It is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society" and I'm proudly standing where every conservative should be.

It sounds like Boehner just wants to cut to the chase. "Look, do you want to stick with the guy who can't find his ass with two hands and a flash light? Or do you go with the new guy. It's pretty simple" He's just talking in short hand as is his nature.

Leslen said::::What's scary is that this is the kind of thing it is said R's love

Yes we love denying overwheening, irrational emotion because we believe in a government of laws not men. In a democratic republic our politicians are just selected to represent our interests..not demi-gods to cure spinal cord injuries or stop the seas from rising

http://www.iwise.com/98FhL

when John Kerry is president -- people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk. Get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."

Again this stupid Right-wing "we need to elect someone with a (R) after their name, it doesn't matter who"

That's disingenuous. For one thing, we did just go through a protracted series of primaries. That's how it works.

I'm very happy to vote for Romney, Romney specifically, because he happens to have the skill-set, proven expertise, empirically tested experience and success in precisely those spheres and problem-solving situations I consider most relevant and critical at this moment to our nation's health and future.

Romney is not going to be POTUS of MA, hamstrung by a MA legislature. I'm not looking for fire-breathing conservative rhetoric from a POTUS to "excite" me, I'm looking for actual real world results, and Romney is someone used to attending to the bottom line and taking responsibility for actual real world results, good and bad. Not just looking to get an "A" for effort, like Obama.

IMO Romney would be light-years better than Obama as POTUS. You don't think he's "the One"? The only people expecting to vote for a politican who would be "the One" are the kind of people who swooned for 2008 Obama.

"but Romney has an uphill battle, because his nomination kicked me out of the voting booth, and I can't be the only one.

I'm mulling over how much I despise ObamaCare - to see if it's worth compromising my values on cultism - but I doubt it:

The Right has simply "screwed the pooch" this time,..."

The only other person I have ever heard describe LDS as a "cult" was a Mormon friend of mine. He thought it was a cult but still belonged, although I don't know how active he was.

Whether I have positive thoughts about the LDS theology or not, I think that, for some reason, the Mormon religion produces responsible citizens. My college roommate, whose father was a millionaire real estate developer in the 50s, would only have Mormons for his lawyer, accountant and doctor. My accountant for the past 30 years is Mormon. I wish I could have turned my entire net worth over to him to invest for me in 1982. If I had, I would be rich.

That's sort of the way I feel about Romney. He does seem a bit too good to be true but that is the result of watching politicians for 60 years.

Romney is the guy who can pull the country out of this spin we are in. With a Republican Congress and the tea party to watch for stragglers, we can get the economy moving again and save the future. If Obama wins, I will live out the rest of my life in sadness for my kids and grandkids.

I have never been so apprehensive for the country. I feel sheepish around young doctors these days as I hear them talk about the time when I was in practice as "the golden age" of medicine. I feel so sorry for them. I can't go in the doctors' dining room at the hospital, even though I am still technically on the staff, because I feel the unspoken jealousy. They know their future is screwed and I was so lucky to be born when I was.

Well said (that Boehner guy). It seems like an emerging meme and people like Crystal, Laura Ingraham and other conservatives are doing it -- God only knows why) and is being picked up and promoted of course by Obama and his cronies. It is about how unexciting Romney is and how his responses are all plain and God forbid, boring -- no zingers like that Newt guy, I guess. Elaine Chao had the perfect response to Laura yesterday -- it is not about entertainment, it is not about exciting us. Serious matters require competence which is what we need and Romney has. Where did all this likeability and having a beer and blah, blah, celebrity light politicians stuff come from?

Not everybody who voted for Obama worshipped him the way Althouse and some of you write. While several friends and I voted for him, I don't recall anybody that seemed to love him. But speaking just for myself, it was really nice to have an articulate President with a more Democratic platform and principles after eight years of Bush and his administration, so yes, I liked him. I didn't expect him to change my life. I didn't even necessarily expect him to succeed. When he took over I thought we might be about two minutes from a complete economic collapse, but it didn't happen. My belief is (I freely admit I could be completely wrong) that Obama's policies helped stave off an imminent depression, at least for the time being. I think it's still possible no matter who gets elected that the world economy, or even only the west or the US could fall apart.

I think many black people were emotionally tied up with Obama, and I always thought that was pretty understandable. I don't begrudge that. Just as I don't begrudge anyone who doesn't like him.

I get the feeling a lot of conservatives are getting used to voting for people they don't like so they probably exaggerate based on the fact that most Democrats actually like their candidates. Until we find out for sure they fucked us over, too.

Why not? Just like what the Right is doing now. Obama's election was groupthink incarnate. I'll call out this stupidity wherever I see it, and - sorry if it busts your bubble - but I saw it then and I see it now. Not Thinking - or that regularly appearing "false choice" I've heard so much about - is the post-Boomer way of life. You can't see your way out and demand to be allowed to continue. Snark, about anyone opposing you, is all you've got:

You're the one snarking. I just wonder why you even bother. WHat isn't a cult to you? You could make the same argument about any president who believed in God and was religious considering your animus towards religion in general, which would negate voting for, almost any president we've ever had.If Romney were somehow running as a mormon to impose mormon values on the world, I would of course oppose him, but I don't even know how much he believes in Mormonism. Is he a mormon or a Mormon for example. The fact is, despite him being part of a cult, as you argue, he's been extremely successful as a business person, has raised a large/happy family, ran a state as governor, and is for all intents and purposes a mainstream figure. This is not David Kouresh we're talking about here.ANd it's not as if he doesn't have a record. What cultish behavior has Romney exhibited within the past, oh I don't know, 20-30 years that he's been in the public eye, that would make you, a supposed conservative, be willing to put up with 4 more years of Obama economics for. Let's weigh Obamanamics for 4 more years versus the fact that Romney believes in a wacky versoin of christianity. Is said christianity calling America Amerikkka, like Barack's christianity? You have only two choices for president this year. If you're going to sit this one out because Romney belongs to a "cult", then take then next 4 years of Obama and don't complain about it. Your conservativism certainly won't rise above your hatred of cults. So who needs you. All you're doing at this point is complaining. WHat you have is a failure to distinguish between the little evil and the big evil,the little priority versus the big priorities and your bigotry towars cults would amount to cutting off your nose to spite your face, if Obama got reelected.Your two choices are, preventing a mormon who seems good on economics and appears mainstream when it comes to his moral beliefs (despite being part of a cult) from entering the white house, or preventing Obama from keeping his seat for 4 more years and wreaking more havoc. THat's it. Make your choice.

"It is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society" and I'm proudly standing where every conservative should be.

With Obama and Obamacare, Crack. That's where you'll be standing.

There is a certain set of Republicans who stood with Obama the last time around (like Buckley's kid). They were stupid and bought the rhetoric. I don't know too many of them that are glad they voted for Obama though. Now, 4 years in you'd be the "conservative" that because of your hangups abount tangential or nonexistent issues doesn't pitch in to remove Obama.With friends like you, who needs enemies. If Obama is reelected, I'll be sure to thank you that we didn't get a member of a cult in the White House, while I have to live with 4 more years of stagnant non existant recovery. Oh, but we would have a memmber of a black theology church in the White House and a leftist overseeing our economy. That would be so much better. /sarcasm.

And the fact that you are weighing Obamacare against Romney, solely because Romney belongs to a cult (despite the fact that he has a LONG history not as some radical cultist, but as a mainstream businessman and politician, and a non extremist one at that) means that you can't see the forest for the trees.

If Romney were somehow running as a mormon to impose mormon values on the world, I would of course oppose him, but I don't even know how much he believes in Mormonism.

Promoting - and viciously defending - the election of someone you know nothing about to be in charge of the most powerful office in the world. Brilliant.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you this prime example of what passes for intelligence in the 21st century. Like the Khmer Rouge cult of Vietnam, it is based on a prideful ignorance, and willing to attack anyone who shows signs of - or dares to say - they actually know something.

It cannot be dented by evidence. Reason will leave no mark. History and logic exist merely for the exercise of pushing them aside. All that matters is belief, in one's beliefs, and nothing else can be allowed to intrude because your beliefs can never be wrong.

I ask you - since I don't charge everything or everyone with being part of a cult, and have made many predictions about them since I've been here - when have you others been right and I proven wrong? I can show you examples of it going the other way around.

One thing I learned, this week, is I'm less offended by what comes out of people's asses than what comes out of their mouths. And I've got good reason for that.

Crack Emcee wrote;Promoting - and viciously defending - the election of someone you know nothing about to be in charge of the most powerful office in the world. Brilliant.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you this prime example of what passes for intelligence in the 21st century. Like the Khmer Rouge cult of Vietnam, it is based on a prideful ignorance, and willing to attack anyone who shows signs of - or dares to say - they actually know something. You argue that I don't know anything about Romney. Do you know anything about him that would suggest he is a radical religious nut? If you want to ding me for my lack of intel, I can similarly ding you on the very same grounds.Two things I do know. One, he has had a long career in the spotlight, and he may be insufficiently conservative, and he may be a waffler, but there is nohting to suggest that his mormonism is anything to worry about. If I don't know enough about his mormonism, it's because he doens't wear it on his sleeve. Meaning, even if he does have wacky views on Jesus coming to America, it hasn't stopped him from governing as a moderate conservative (and by moderate I mean not like a cultist religious zealot), nor from succeeding in business on multiple fronts. And his dad, who was similarly a mormon was also revered as a great politician, despite belonging to a cult. So despite your insinuations, you dont really have anything other than, he belongs to a cult. When he ran Bain capital what cultish behavior did he exhibit that undermined working at Bain capital or suggested he was trying to remake the world into a mormon theocracy/utopia. When he was governor, you may have called him a squish, but what cultish behavior did he exhibit?

And two, he's not Obama. And I know what Obama has done and will attempt to do in the future. Number two by the way, should be all that a real "conservative" needs to not help him maintain his current office.

I certainly don't buy into Mormonism, but in electing Romney I don't think I have to, nor is his candidacy about Mormonism. His personal beliefs on the hereafter are not going to impact my bottom line nor yours. Can you say the same about Obama's policies?

I figured you'd write that. Bigoted thinking only makes you look really small. \And what makes a mormon more of a cult member than say a Muslim, or a christian or a Jew? After all, Christians believe that Joshua told the sun to stop while he was figinting gods enemies because he hadn't finished the job, and the sun followed his command. That there is some pretty crazy/magical thinking. Do you think no christian should be able to be president with such crazy beliefs? Because, sad to disappoint you, but many/most presidents have been religious, sometimes stridently so, and despite believing crazy belief stories, still managed to make coherent foreign and domestic policies. Or maybe they were like many christians, practicing but not believing that the word of the bible was literal. Or like deists who believe in none of the fanciful tales of the bible but only believe in it's moral precepts. How do you know Romney isn't THAT kind of Mormon?

People don't vote against people. They vote FOR a candidate, or they stay home.

My motivation to vote is almost always to vote against an incumbent. My drive to vote in the Utah primary was to vote against Hatch (didn't do any good.) In 2000, 2004 & 2008, I voted against the Democrat despite my dislike Bush and even stronger dislike of McCain.

Crack Emcee wrote:You expect him to be suspected to have "undermined" a company he founded? Is logic really that far away from your grey matter? You're insinuating his mormonism is somehow sinister. I'm asking what did he do while running said companies that has any bearing on his religosity? Is neutraceuticals a vehicle that somehow prosteltizes for mormonism? Or, is he a mormon who invested in a company that sells vitamins? Unless he were using the company as a vehicle to push his religion, then what does it matter what his religion is? Goodness, you're an idiot - I did two posts on Bain:

So his failing is that he opened a vitamin company? Wow, that's some debunking.

HEre's some news for you Crack, many legitimate doctors also believe in vitamins and minerals and supplements as aids to health. Case in point, when I had very high tryglicerides my doctor prescribed me a medicine which is essentiall fish oil (i.e. omega 3,6,9). its under a brand name and put out by a pharmaceutical company, but it's the same crap you can buy at a health food store. Linus Pauling earned a nobel prize with his studies on Vitamin C. Have you ever heard of ricketts? That's simply not having enough vitamin C. Whether you take it in an orange or if you buy vitamin C from a vitamin company, it will help if you have Ricketts. POint being, there is plenty of evidence that various vitamins and minerals have an effect on health.

You link a study that purportedly shows that Calcium supplements increase the risk of heart attacks. FIrst off, lets understand that the idea of people needing calcium for strong bones is not some concoction made up by mormons and by Mitt Romney. THe Milk companies have been touting why you should drink milk because of it's calcium. Which in turn was based on science.You find a study now that says calcium supplements are bad, you have to weigh that against other studies that show the benefits of taking calcium for people with osteoperosis for example. Who's right or wrong? It's not an either or. Scientists have been pushing calcium as a beneficial thing to take, and if anything vitamin companies have been taking their lead from science.

Do all the wonderful benefits ultimately pan out? Well, some do and some dont.Currently there are a lot of doctors discussing benefits of Vitamin D in disease prevention. Ulitmately there will be some studies that say yes, vitamin d is effective. If you are deficient in Vitamin D though, it's certainly a benefit.

What I think you're doing is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Because the case for a certain supplement was wrong or overstated, therefore no supplement has worth. And that is bull crap.

Finally, let's talk about something like aspirin. Is that new age junk science or legitmate medicine? IT's certainly prescribed by doctors. It potentially has benefits for people with heart disease, but many doctors say it also has risks because it can cause excessive bleeding/thinning of the blood and ulcers. But what is aspirin?

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blaspirin.htm

Aspirin is basically a compound (salicin) derived from the bark of a willow plant. What was that you were saying about the quackery of medicine derived from things like herbs and what have you?

-cont-This is exactly how legitimate medicine is made. Compounds that are beneficial to something that ails us are extracted from plants or animals. Here for example are some drugs derived from plants and are used for various things, medically:

http://rainforest-database.com/plants/plantdrugs.htm

at the most basic level, if the concept that certain compounds can help us with certian things and we extract said compounds to help us is sound, then why would it matter if it was extracted by a pharmaceutical company or by a vitamin company?

If you look at my link for plant based drugs you'll find that 7 are being used to treat cancer. For example:vinblastine"A chemical discovered in the Madagascar Periwinkle in the 1950s. Vinblastine is the first drug of choice in many forms of leukemia and since the 1950's it has increased the survival rate of childhood leukemias by 80%"Medicine derived from plants. If you knew someone who had leukemia, they might be taking this drug, which again, is derived from plants and herbs.

So, if some Mormon thinks that taking herbs or plants can cure them of diseases, maybe that's because the medical community does too, in various cases.

Here's a link to a study on Vitamin D:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14985208?dopt=Abstract

which concludes:The recommended adequate intakes for vitamin D are inadequate, and, in the absence of exposure to sunlight, a minimum of 1000 IU vitamin D/d is required to maintain a healthy concentration of 25(OH)D in the bloodWhere would you get such vitamin D if you were deficient? From a health food store, and most likely using a vitamin or food enriched with vitamin D. Meaning, a compnay like Neutraceuticals would be the one making or distributing said vitamin.

What makes a mormon more of a cult member than say a Muslim, or a christian or a Jew?

How about all those newspaper articles, over the course of Joseph Smith's entire "career," detailing what acts of fraud he committed.

I don't know of one Muslim, Christian, or Jewish founder who has those.

BTW - I notice you didn't comment on either the evidence of Romney's fraud in my post, or my reply to your idiotic suggestion he would be accused of undermining his own company, which leads me to wonder:

Are you going to insist on making me go over material I've been over, at least, a billion times before here? Or can you just admit you don't pay attention to what you don't want to know, as most ignoramuses do?

Is neutraceuticals a vehicle that somehow prosteltizes for mormonism? Or, is he a mormon who invested in a company that sells vitamins? Unless he were using the company as a vehicle to push his religion, then what does it matter what his religion is?

1) I notice you focused on the vitamins and not the supplements - the same con Romney uses.

2) What part of Neutraceuticals being an extension of Mormonism didn't you understand?

3) Romney is not someone "who invested in a company that sells vitamins" - that's not what Neutraceuticals does - really, are you an idiot?

4) Not one word on the role of Orrin Hatch and the anti-science DSHEA law - perfectly timed to help Romney's scam.

5) Nothing about the worthlessness of what Romney sells, or who it's hurt - just praise for what a great business man he supposedly is.

Yeah, if you consider the American people the enemy.

Oh wait - we're all evil "gentiles" in Mormon theology - so he DOES consider us the enemy. Sheep to be fleeced for the greater glory of God.

But you wouldn't know anything about that - despite supporting him to rule over us.

Just in case you don't get there - because facts and evidence make your head explode - here's "The Bottom Line" on Pauling's quackery in the link above:

Although Pauling's megavitamin claims lacked the evidence needed for acceptance by the scientific community, they have been accepted by large numbers of people who lack the scientific expertise to evaluate them. Thanks largely to Pauling's prestige, annual vitamin C sales in the United States have been in the hundreds of millions of dollars for many years. Pauling also played a role in the health food industry's successful campaign to weaken FDA consumer protections laws. The Linus Pauling Institute that bears his name has evolved into a respectable organization. But Pauling's irrational advice about supplements continues to lead people astray.

That would also include you, Romney, Mormon's, and all the rest of you illiterate, deceptive, deceitful, and immoral freaks who think getting people to waste money on worthless items is somehow "good business."

I can't wait until you get your hero into office so he can REALLY get to work,...

Crack,SEriously, you are unhinged. Romney did not create the concept that vitamin C is good for the common cold, or cancer prevention, or overall health, or ricketts. THis is what scientists have written, and not just Linus Pauling.

HEre for example is the Hepatitis C page extolling the virtues of Vitamin C, not just for Hep C but also for immune function.

Romney didn't come up with said study, Romney merely put money into a company that says "If you want to buy vitamin C, here's some supplements" and if you don't, then don't. If you don't like vitamin C or any other vitamin, then dont' buy them.

But all you're doing is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Even if some of Linus Paulings most exdtreme claims might be proven to be wrong over time, doesn't mean that Vitamin C doesn't have perfectly valid uses in countless other diseases and your skeptic website only looks at the studies it wants that study the narrowest of claims opn the benefits of vitamin C or whatever vitamin you want, and then say that it invalidates everything positive about Vitamin C.Talk about intellectual dishonesty.

For the record, I make no claims that vitamin C will cure everytying under the sun, but i will say that science has shown that it's beneficial in many instances, particularly in immune function. But to blame Romney for pushhing vitamins as if he creatd the concept is ludicrous. Vitamins and minerals are essential necessities for life. Ideally you should get them from the food you eat, but for everyone that's not a possibility.

ANd the funny thing is that, in many cases, I actually agree with you on new ageism. I wouldn't lump everything you do into new ageism, since for you that seems to be "everything Crack Emcee doesn't agree with be it vitamins or reiki or meditation or buddhism". It's all one big new age for you.

WHereas, I might not buy the spiritual aspect of meditation, but that doesn't mean it wont work as a way to relax your mind.I may find some claims from alternative medicine proponentns to be quackery, but that doens't mean that every utterance is therefore quackery. Vitamin C again, is a great example. If you had rickets, would you argue that you woulnd't take Vitamin C because Linus Pauling was a quack?

2) What part of Neutraceuticals being an extension of Mormonism didn't you understand?

well, how is neutraceuticals different than any other company that also sell supplements? Does neutraceuticals sell special Mormon vitamin c or if you buy a supplement are you innundated with Mormon sayings? How would it be any different than if you bought the exact same things from gnc or amazon?It's just a vitamin company that sells vitamins, just like any other company that sells vitamins.

Not by much - all of them were started by con men who knew a good scam when they saw one - and not just "inspired" by one.

Man, you're a loser.

I can see why Romney's so attractive to you now, and why this country's in so much trouble,...

Again with the extremely broad brush. I love how you say, ALL of them were started by con men who knew a good scam, but then list only a few obvious scammers, as if every company that produces a vitamin or a supplement is in that list and is the same. You seem to have an issue with finding an issue with some, and then extrapolating it to mean all.I'm the first to acknowledge that there are scammers out there who've produced some supplements that proved to be scams or didn't work as advertised, but even acknowledfging that, how does that discount legitimate vitamin manufacturers or the concept of vitamins/minerals/supplemens. For example, one of the products you cite as a scam is an omega 3 product. Now, the person who started the company may have been a scam artist, but how does that disprove the idea that taking omega 3's will help things like triglycerides or cholesterol? If you think that they are scams, then what about a product like Lovasa, which is fish oil that has to be prescribed by a doctor.

It would be like saying because you have a problem with beta carotene or can show that its benefits are overstated or that one manufacturer of a beta carotene product is a scammer, .or by producing a link showing the evidence, that therefore no vitamin has any value whatsoever and your link not only disproves it's efficacy for any and all medical conditions, but similarly disproves the efficacy of every other supplement ever created as well.

I suppose I could do the same thing with traditional medicine, find one that led to problems or deaths and thus say that any medicine produced by pharma companies are scams and their producers criminals.

Who's the dummy again? if you looked up intellectual fallacy on Wikipedia, I'd think you'd find a bunch that fit your brand of thinking.

But I get it now, Romney is not fit to be president because.... he started a vitamin company. For that we sholud instead put up with four more years of Obamacare. Yup, really conservative of you, mate.

And by the way, even if you personally don't see the value of vitamins, that doesn't mean they have no value for those who want to purchase them. So what's wrong with a business catering to their needs? There's nothing illegal about selling vitamins, and if people don't want to buy vitamin c they don't have to. But people want vitamin c because they've heard positive things about from people in the medical community. So what's wrong with companies that sell vitamin c for those that want it?